<p>hampster, if we shouldnt count selectivity in our comparison, why should we compare attraction? the fact that MIT attracts students around from around the world does not make it better than IIT. the IIT lifestyle and prereqs may hamper the global appeal, but in India, the attraction to the IIT school system is palpable.</p>
<p>i'm not saying one is better thaN the other, but i dont think MIT's global applicant pool shows its superiority.</p>
<p>fyi: i am not an indian student, nor am i considering either of these schools.</p>
<p>but I'm only allowed to recruit players within 100 miles of my hometown, and you're also a recruiter, but you can recruit anyone from anywhere in the world. Who do you think is more likely to have a stronger team?</p>
<p>That's the reason why MIT probably has a stronger student body. The very best in the world, including some from India I imagine, flock to MIT whereas only the very best from India, in general, flock to IIT.</p>
<p>I'm not saying it's not a top notch school. I just don't think it's on par with MIT. Of course, you can say that IIT doesn't focus on research and it's actually quite very different from MIT or provide some other reason, but can't we say this about pretty much any school? If so, then we can't really say that MIT is better than Tokyo University or the National University of Singapore, or the University of the Philippines, or Technion in Israel, or Imperial College in London, or any other topnotch school from its respective country. Because you can always say that it's different or it's comparing apples and oranges.</p>
<p>One school resides in a country that is THE unarguable global leader in higher education (not to mention the only global superpower) with arguably the top 5 schools in the world (including MIT) -- schools which attract the best and brightest students from around the globe. The other school has very limited global name value and resides in an emerging market with marginal global power and extremely limited global appeal.</p>
<p>oh ok - i think i was misunderstood. what i meant to say, was: just as the selectivity should not be the sole derterminant of quality when comparing two schools, APPLICANT (note: not admitted) pool should not be the sole criteria either.</p>
<p>obviously, MIT has much greater name recognition, as it is situated in "THE inarguable global leader in higher education (not to mention the only superpower." (the_prestige) i totally agree - having a degree from MIT would seem more valuable than one from IIT - "no comparison really." but the actual school and students is not the same as "global name value"</p>
<p>and, the soccer example still doesnt click with me. is UMichigan better than UC Berkeley because UMichigan has a much higher OOS percentage? not really. both schools are quite similar in most areas, but UCB is like the soccer team with the 100 mile limit, and UMich is the one with free range. are the schools themselves so vastly different due to their admitted students' states?</p>
<p>once again, i am not saying IIT is better, not even equal to MIT. i'm just gathering info/questioning how these judgements can be made.</p>
<p>Hlover, your UC Berkeley reference is... odd. I live right near Michigan and I would say that Berkeley's reputation is just as good if not better than U of M (in terms of the average person's view of both colleges. i am in no way saying UC Berkeley is better than U of M) Maybe the example was completely hypothetical but why make a comparison that doesn't work? It just makes the issue more confusing.</p>
<p>every school has a slightly different reputation in different part of the US and in different parts of the world. i live near michigan as well, and in my town and high school, UMich is looked upon as equal to UCB in terms of prestige - however that was not the point i was discussing.
my example with these two schools was my attempt to illustrate how both schools are academically on par - yet one (UCB) has a much higher in state percentage, thus limiting its applicant pool and admitted students to california. whereas, at UMich, in state accounts for much less, as the state has a lower in state requirement. for this example, UMich is comparable to MIT, with the widespread applicant pool. UCB is comparable to IIT, with applicants all from one state (country) and further requirements (specific fine arts credit, for example).
in your (getsome23) post, you basically agreed with me that UCB's rep is "just as good, if not better than U of M." both schools have reasonably close USNews overall ranking and resource ranking. </p>
<p>is UMich better solely because of it's geographic diversity? is MIT better solely because of it's geographic diversity?</p>
<p>^that was my purpose of the comparison. only the above question. nothing else. sorry if that was confusing. i can drop that comparison, but i though i ought to explain it a little better, and see if it takes hold.</p>
<p>now, for my overall opinion:</p>
<p>there are many other factors that make MIT a better overall school for the international applicant: research, resources, money, being in a great United States city, name recognition etc.</p>
<p>my take on IIT:
the IIT school system is totally different (throw in apples to oranges phrase here). engineering in india is treated differently than in the united states. the IIT school system's hype and prestige is similar to the ivy league here in america. high school students at decent to good schools in india are obesessed with "tuitions" and IIT exam prep courses like we are with Kaplan and Princeton review for SATs and ACTs. Engineering is almost like a liberal arts study (from what i have gathered). if students are unsure of what they want to study, engineering is treated as the best place to start. and some of the best places to study engineering in india are at the IITs.</p>
<p>^^^ that's great "in India" but frankly, to put it bluntly, who cares what goes on "in India"? I mean, I'm not trying to be sarcastic -- I know that IIT is HYPSM all wrapped up into one "in India" (case and point: I knew a couple of IIT grads from b-school and they were probably two of the smartest -- text book smart -- math geniuses -- that I will ever likely meet). So I have a great deal of respect for how hard it is to matriculate into IIT where you've got literally millions of kids trying to get a spot. But, like I said before, let's not lose the forest for the trees. This is "in India". </p>
<p>Take a step back (i.e. "out of India") and its level of prestige (to the general population -- i.e. outside of the highly specialized world of engineering and computer science circles) drops like a stone. You can't say that about MIT. Perhaps Caltech is a better example since for those who know, Caltech is the business, but for your average schmoe you mention Caltech and he'd likely stare at you like a guy taking your order for a Big Mac.</p>
<p>once again, i agree that MIT is a better school to hold a degree from in the real world. no questions asked.</p>
<p>but
a) i do care what goes on "in India," and the OP seems to as well. i assume this because a potential applicant to IIT must be either Indian, or able to handle themselves in India. correct me if i'm wrong.
b) i might have a personal reason to care, but since you brought some of your interaction with IIT grads - I'll share mine: my father graduated from IIT and applied to b-schools in the US. he was accepted to one the top programs (I can PM this to you if you want) and offered jobs as a prof at unis including UPenn and MIT. in my mind his educational/career path translates as pretty successful - and started at an IIT.</p>
<p>c) I UNDERSTAND MIT HAS BETTER NAME RECOGNITION AND PRESTIGE IN THE US.
how many times do I have to say this?!?! I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT</p>
<p>d) i do however disagree that most people at MIT, IIT, caltech, Stanford, HYP or whatever top school do not worry about how the "general population" will respond to conversational chatter about their degree. Students care about future employers (ie companies, industries, govt agencies....not "your average joe schmoe") Yes, MIT has that national prestige and the obvious recognition in the job market. Yes, IIT is way more valued and recognized in India than anywhere else - BUT in the spheres where it matters, IIT does have a formidable rep.</p>
<p>^^^ i don't disagree with what you have written, on balance.</p>
<p>But as to your last point, if you could graduate with a degree from an institution that:</p>
<p>A) Is held in high esteem by those "that matter" (i.e. grad schools, professionals, your future mother-in-law, etc.)
B) Is held in high esteem by Joe the Barber, Billy Bob the Mechanic and the cute blond sitting at the bar</p>
<p>If you HAD to choose one, you'd obviously choose "A"... but if you COULD have BOTH, isn't that inherently better? I mean, why not?</p>
<p>The average Indian is not as educated as the average American. This is a much a fact as the average American's yearly income being higher as well. Since much more Indians apply to ITT than Americans to MIT, this drives down the acceptance rate (along with India being much more populated than the United States).</p>
<p>Furthermore, MIT has selective applicants. The average blue-collar worker or 2.5 GPA student is not going to take the SATs and apply to MIT unlike for students in India and China who all take the tests and apply to the top schools (even if their chances are close to zilch). </p>
<p>Therefore, acceptance rates for ITT and say, Beijing University or Tsinghua University should not be compared to those of top U.S. universities who have relatively higher quality applicants and a much more selective applicant pool.</p>
<p>Well, I'm an Indian who wants to study math. I can tell you that IITs do NOT get the best students in India. In fact, the JEE (IIT entrance exam) has indirectly created a 'coaching industry' where weak students learn by rote just to get into IIT, and then no longer care about academics (at IIT). Moreover, these students do badly at high school due to stress.</p>
<p>And I can't speak about MIT but IIT is NOT a place where you'd like to major in math.</p>
<p>applicant pool or student body should or is the sole criterion for why MIT is the better school. The analogy was meant to illustrate why acceptance rate is a misleading figure to rely on and why MIT is more like to have the stronger student body. </p>
<p>Your Berkeley-Michigan analogy is a good point, but the problem is that Michigan doesn't attract the very best applicants like MIT does so even if it has a wider geographic range to select applicants, the applicants that it manages to attract aren't going to be on par with HYP or an MIT. You can compare Berkeley to lower ranked national universities or national liberal arts colleges. Chances are, Berkeley is going to have stronger students even if it doesn't have the geographic diversity of these national schools.</p>
<p>I don't think anyone here is saying that IIT is not a good school. It's just that comparing it to a school like MIT is a bit of a stretch. We're talking about MIT here not some mid-level or even decently good American school.</p>
<p>Also, sure, I'll grant that it's comparing apples and oranges. But comparing MIT to Tokyo University would also be comparing apples and oranges so there's no reason to single out IIT.</p>
<p>Sounds like going to IIT for undergrad is like going to Princeton where there is a huge focus on undergrad teaching in science and technology. From what I’ve heard, IITs produce very few Phd’s, more than half the Phd’s in India come from IISc in Bangalore.</p>
<p>As a graduate of the IIT, albeit 30+ years ago, I have to say that education in the US intrinsically has a lot more flexibility. The average IITian of my era (5 year bachelor’s degree) clearly took more courses in Engg than the average MIT undergrad, but in general, our vision was to excel in what was done in class, and there was little emphasis or opportunity to explore beyond. When I look at how my S (sophomore SCS at CMU) is compared to me at age 18, while I could have done differential equations better them him and solved problems in physics text book better than he does, I believe he is much better positioned in both technical and all-around skills that are useful in industry. One point regarding the selectivity - it is not inconceivable that in many high schools in the US, there isn’t a single student who really wants to go MIT because there is so much other opportunity that’s a better match to the students’ interests. In India, there are not that many schools labelled “elite” whose degrees are door-openers. This leads to a much higher number of school kids (or their parents) who seek an IIT admission leading to higher selectivity figures.</p>
<p>I still feel those five years were the among the best of my life, and I have the fondest memories of my learning there, but if a student had the ability to handle either IIT or a top tech school in the US, I would clearly recommend the latter. Cost of course is another issue - I’m sure it’s vastly less than the 50 grand or so a year that a US university charges; when I attended it was about 300-400 bucks a year for tuition, room, and board, the bulk being for food.</p>
<p>PS post #35: I was born in Bangalore, and while IISc does have a well established graduate program, your figures about half the PhDs is off.</p>
<p>Isn’t it amazing what a simple Google search can turn up!
Here’s some recent data on research papers published from India.</p>
<p>“Among the major countries, India has
one of the largest infrastructures of engineering
and technological institutes (over
2000). It also produces the largest number
of engineering and technology graduates
(over 300,000) every year. Some of
these institutes are very prestigious and
even make it to the list of top universities
in the world1–3. Only a handful of institutes
(IISc and some IITs) among the
major Indian engineering and technological
institutes, however, account for
most of the research output of the country.
Majority of the others, however have
very meagre research output, which is
also reflected in the poor out-turn of
Ph Ds (less than a thousand each year)
from these institutions.”</p>
<p>Getting into IIT’s is difficult. It’s very very difficult. Nowadays, it’s become such a craze to go to IIT that coaching institutes have sprung up, where children go and study day and night. Unless you are willing to sacrifice a LOT, and spend every waking moment studying and solving problems similar to ones they might ask, you won’t get into IIT. As a result, India’s brightest and most hardworking people get into IIT.</p>
<p>Compare this with MIT. You need to be a well rounded individual, and not spend days just poring over books. FACT - It’s easier to get into MIT. But that doesn’t mean IIT’s are better.</p>
<p>The IIT intake is very very good. But their facilities are below par when compared to MIT. But for undergrad studies, there’s little difference.
Even once a student enters IIT, he can only pursue his branch related subjects. He can’t take up sports, music etc…The course is problem solving oriented, not practical oriented. But the competition is very high. IIT grads can work hard, under pressure, and work intellegently.</p>
<p>I’m in BITS-pilani, another reputed university in India (I think it’s at par with IIT’s except that we don’t recieve that much publicity). I too prepared for IIT entrance for 2 years. I know the rigour involved, and the sacrifices you have to make. I know how even the brightest are outdone by better students.</p>
<p>Any sensible student would choose going to MIT over IIT (if money isn’t a factor). But then again, that doesn’t mean MIT’s better. Cuz after leavin IIT, you’ll be really toughened up. I know IITians who love it when they go to MIT, stanford…cuz they enjoy what they’re learning, and they realise they’re so good at it.</p>
<p>My honest opinion is this MIT is MIT. You simply cant campare it with IIT. In its own respect, IIT is one of the best technical universities in the world. And ‘some’ of its graduates are more technically talented than their MIT counterparts. But MIT’s mission is not to produce mere engineers with brutish technical ability. MIT produces intellectuals who are taught to integrate their engineering skills with vision. So the comparison really falls short of its intended purpose which is vague as well.</p>
<p>I agree. The actuall IIT exam is REDICULOUS compared to anything high school students in the US will see. However, it focuses on a LOT of chemistry that one would probably never use as an engineer unless they are a chemical engineer. The math section itself involves pretty high level math and require much critical thinking. Unlike the SAT, however, there is no English section (primarily because this is not that big of a concern to colleges in India). Overall, MIT is better than IIT due to the research and opportunity there. Sure IIT has come a long way, but MIT has made more contributions to mankind and continues to do so on a regular basis. IIT grads usually go off to work in high positions in TATA indicom or some other big company in India.</p>